Jharkhand High Court
C.M.P./287/2026 of BRAJESH KUMAR GUPTA Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND, THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY on 19 August 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C.M. P No. 287 of 2026 …. Brajesh Kumar Gupta, aged about 67 years, Son of Late Rameshwar Dayal Gupta, Resident of Addi Bangla Road, P.O. and P.S. – Jhumri Tilaiya, District – Koderma ……Petitioner Versus 1. The
2026:JHHC:25120
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
C.M. P No. 287 of 2026
….
Brajesh Kumar Gupta, aged about 67 years, Son of Late Rameshwar Dayal Gupta, Resident of Addi Bangla Road, P.O.
and P.S. – Jhumri Tilaiya, District – Koderma
……Petitioner
Versus
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. The State of Jharkhand, through the Chief Secretary, having its office at 1st Floor, Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S. – Dhurwa and District – Ranchi.
2. The Commissioner, North Chotanagpur Division, Hazaribag, P.O. and P.S. – Hazaribag, District-Hazaribagh.
3. The Deputy Commissioner, Koderma, having office at Koderma, P.O. – Koderma, and P.S. -Koderma, District- Koderma.
4. The Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Koderma, office at Koderma, P.O.- Koderma and P.S. – Koderma, District- Koderma.
5. The Circle Officer, Chandwara, P.O. and P.S. – Chandwara and District – Koderma.
……Opp. Parties.
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD
-----
For the Petitioner : Mr. Kushal Kumar, Advocate
For the State
: None
……
Order No.02/19th August, 2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. However, none appears on behalf of the State.
2. This C.M.P has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for restoration of W.P.(C) (Filing) No. 3958 of 2025, which stood dismissed on 10.12.2025 due to non-compliance of peremptory order dated 19.11.2025 passed by this Court.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he was under mistaken impression that all the pending defect(s) have been removed. Therefore, he could not verify the pending defetct(s). It is further submitted that the petitioner will remain
2026:JHHC:25120
careful in future and hence the W.P.(C) (Filing) No. 3958 of 2025 may be restored.
4. However, none appears on behalf of the State on repeated call.
5. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and in view of the averments in paragraph no.6 to 9 to the instant petition, the present C.M.P No. 287 of 2026 is allowed. W.P.(C) (Filing) No. 3958 of 2025 is restored to its original file.
6. Thus, C.M.P No. 287 of 2026 is allowed and stands disposed of.
7. Office to list this case as per roster.
(Sanjay Prasad, J.) Dated 19.08.2026 Nishant/-